Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / January 2004
Young Breast Cancer Survivors Often Suffer Emotional Problems
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Ilena - 19 Jan 2004 21:00 GMT Note: Found this article very interesting ...
It didn't mention how many women had reconstruction after mastectomy ...
~~~~~~~~~
Young Breast Cancer Survivors Often Suffer Emotional Problems
Awareness Can Help Women, Doctors Cope Article date: 2003/12/23 Young women who are treated for breast cancer often suffer emotional disruption that persists for years after their treatment, according to researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).
Women younger than 50 may be especially hard-hit by feelings of vulnerability and a fear of cancer recurrence, the researchers reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Vol. 21, No. 22: 4184-4193). About one-fourth of breast cancer cases in the United States occur in women in this age group.
"A lot of oncologists are not necessarily well-equipped to address these issues," said lead researcher Patricia Ganz, MD, of UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center. "Whoever's taking care of these survivors needs to know about these problems."
Ganz and her colleagues examined 577 women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer an average of 6 years before the study. Their ages at diagnosis ranged from 25 to 51. About half the women had been treated by mastectomy, while the others had lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy. About three-fourths of the women had received some extra treatment after their breast cancer surgery, such as tamoxifen, chemotherapy, or both.
The women answered an extensive 45-page questionnaire about their physical and emotional functioning, as well as their health.
Women Had Both Physical and Emotional Problems The women were generally in good health several years after their diagnosis, although almost all of them were unhappy with their body. Many had experienced weight gain and about half had problems with breast sensitivity. Many women also complained of general aching, joint pains, and muscle stiffness, as well as forgetfulness and trouble concentrating.
Most of the women were near or past menopause and were having hot flashes and night sweats. Because of their cancer diagnosis, these women were not candidates for hormonal replacement therapy to treat these symptoms.
The youngest women (those who had been between the ages of 25 and 34 at diagnosis) had fewer physical complaints, but more trouble with emotional function.
That finding isn't particularly surprising, Ganz said. Many of these young women may be focused on a first job or getting married and starting a family, and a serious illness can hamper those plans.
"They're at a time in their lives when cancer isn't on their list of expectations," Ganz noted. Young women who had become menopausal (and thus unable to have children) as a result of their treatment were the most likely to be depressed and have a negative attitude toward life.
Older women, who have had more life experiences, may be better equipped to cope with a cancer diagnosis and the effects of treatment, said Ganz.
Support Is Important Women who were in a relationship, those with higher educational levels, and African-Americans reported fewer problems than other women in the study. It may be that these women have stronger support networks or other life experiences that help them cope with the cancer diagnosis, Ganz said. In an earlier study, Ganz and her group found that African-American women find more meaning in life after having breast cancer than white women do.
Young women who are having troubles can take steps to help themselves, Ganz noted. There are medical remedies for many of the late effects of cancer treatment, so letting their doctor know about symptoms is important.
Even knowing they aren't alone in having physical or emotional side effects can be a help, Ganz said. Many survivors focus so intensely on just getting through their disease that they don't realize there could be side effects down the line. Research like this lets these women know they're not crazy, Ganz said. "What they're experiencing is what a lot of other women in their age group experience."
Although the findings may seem negative, Ganz said the overall message for young women is positive. Breast cancer survivors show a great deal of resiliency.
"Overall, women are doing very well, but we'd always like to do better," she said. ~~~~~~~~~
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
bartalo@webtv.net - 19 Jan 2004 23:45 GMT >Older women, who have had more life > experiences, may be better equipped to cope > with a cancer diagnosis and the effects of > treatment, said Ganz. Excuse me but I don't agree with this. As an older woman with a "lot" of life experiences I sure don't feel equipped to cope with this bc. I have gotten through a lot of other illnesses but never had this attitude because I always was sure if I could survive the pain, I would survive . With this bc it seems to be a roll of the dice. I try so hard to be courageous and think positive but when I find out another person did not survive bc, it scares me.
Sorry folks for being so morbid but this "is" a support group so you are not supposed to get mad at me. I'll try to be cheerful tomorrow. If not, I can always tick Alan off by telling him "Tim" won the contest!<g
Bea
WDW1972 - 20 Jan 2004 06:29 GMT >Excuse me but I don't agree with this. As an older woman with a "lot" >of life experiences I sure don't feel equipped to cope with this bc. I >have gotten through a lot of other illnesses but never had this attitude >because I always was sure if I could survive the pain, I would survive . I also didn't agree with it, but am coming from the other direction. As a "younger" woman who had breast cancer at age 43 I see it as part of my past. It's not something I think about and now that it's been 2 years I'm not even nervous/anxious about my mammogram scheduled in 2-3 weeks. The trouble with these surveys is even if the majority of the people experience something, it's possible up to 49% of the people did not. You also don't know what issues/emotional problems these woman had to start with.
If anything, a younger woman should be in better shape - stronger, healthier, etc - in general. I can see a 25 yr old being traumatized by a mastectomy, but with reconstructive surgery available today it's a whole different world than the mastectomies of 30 years ago. In any event, it's something you deal with and move on from, and I don't think a younger person necessarily can't cope as well as an older person.
Sue - DivaofDVC aka WDW1972 DVC '97 OKW, Beach Club, Vero Beach, & Hilton Head
Kaye301 - 20 Jan 2004 09:35 GMT wdw wrote: << I see it as part of my past. It's not something I think about and now that it's been 2 years I'm not even nervous/anxious about my mammogram scheduled in 2-3 weeks. >>
mmm, but you posted to this group, so you must have some related thoughts. I am 53 and b.c. has consumed me in a way I tried to avoid...
WDW1972 - 20 Jan 2004 13:30 GMT >mmm, but you posted to this group, so you must have some related thoughts. >I am 53 and b.c. has consumed me in a way I tried to avoid. I still have this board bookmarked, but only read a few topics every now & then - mostly to help calm people when they post a message freaking out about their cancer diagnosis. I don't worry that my cancer will come back - it might, and if it does I'll deal with it like last time, but the odds are more likely it's never coming back.I'm not a "doom & gloom" person, or a worrywart....my mother got all the worry genes <g>.
Sue - DivaofDVC aka WDW1972 DVC '97 OKW, Beach Club, Vero Beach, & Hilton Head
Kaye301 - 20 Jan 2004 14:09 GMT wdw wrote:<< I don't worry that my cancer will come back - it might, and if it does I'll deal with it like last time, but the odds are more likely it's never coming back. >>
You are so very lucky that the odds are in your favor!
Kaye301 - 20 Jan 2004 14:40 GMT Kaye wrote << You are so very lucky that the odds are in your favor!
And before my dx, I did most all the 'right' stuff--didn't want to have anything to do with breast cancer--and guess where it left me--not very well informed or prepared at the start of what might not have been a situation where the odds were not in my favor...
Alexandra Koffman - 21 Jan 2004 02:46 GMT Odds were you and I wouldn't get breast cancer the first time yet we did. I don't believe in odds anymore <g> Alex
> wdw wrote:<< I don't worry that my cancer will come back - it might, and > if it does I'll deal with it like last time, but the odds are more likely it's > never coming back. >> > > You are so very lucky that the odds are in your favor! bartalo@webtv.net - 21 Jan 2004 03:28 GMT >Odds were you and I wouldn't get breast > cancer the first time yet we did. I don't believe > in odds anymore <g> Alex I don't know what "odds" you all are talking about but the odds sure were that I would never get it! My mom had 8 kids and I was the last on the tree and bc was unheard of in my family. I also did all the right things about getting the mammos etc. and being checked. But.....when the odds change out of your favor........... I think this is why I have such a hard time accepting my bc because it was never anything I ever expected would happen to me. Oh well... life must go on!
Does anyone know when my hair is going to grow back? ( I know, Tim, I'll go read your FAQs now that your url is working.<g)
Bea
A. P. Thorsen - 21 Jan 2004 21:53 GMT > Does anyone know when my hair is going to grow back? ( I know, Tim, I'll > go read your FAQs now that your url is working.<g) I finished chemo in . . . April (2001), I think. I had enough hair that I felt I could stop wearing a wig to work in October that same year. It was very, very short, and very, very curly. Maybe an inch or inch and a half by that time?
This varies a lot by person, and should have some relationship to how fast your hair grew before chemo. There's a study out there somewhere saying that Rogaine helps hair regrow faster denser after chemo. See:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9 6272971&dopt=Abstract
(If that wraps to multiple lines, you'll need to use cut & paste to get it into your browser.)
Ann T. Remove 'dontsendspam' from address to reply by email
Alexandra Koffman - 21 Jan 2004 03:27 GMT Sue, That is great for you! I am assuming you didn't have invasive cancer....you didn't have to have mastectomy or reconstructive surgery... You didn't have to have chemo or sit through the lecture that your cancer is never cured and that is could comeback at anytime and when it did it would be the thing that killed me. Perhaps if I had DCIS....I too could have your attitude....All I know have chemo was the pits. Send me to surgery any day of the week rather than chemo. Alex
"> I still have this board bookmarked, but only read a few topics every now & then
> - mostly to help calm people when they post a message freaking out about their > cancer diagnosis. I don't worry that my cancer will come back - it might, and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Sue - DivaofDVC aka WDW1972 > DVC '97 OKW, Beach Club, Vero Beach, & Hilton Head WDW1972 - 21 Jan 2004 17:42 GMT >Sue, >That is great for you! I am assuming you didn't have invasive cancer....you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >be the thing that killed me. Perhaps if I had DCIS....I too could have your >attitude.... Alex, You're right - my cancer wasn't invasive and treatment consisted of a lumpectomy, 33 rounds of radiation, and now 5 years of tamoxifen. It was a piece of cake compared to what some others have to go thru, and I consider myself very lucky to have caught it so early - before it could be felt but when it could barely be seen on the mammogram film. I had no risk factors at all - no family history, I'm not overweight, I'm 100% healthy in every way (well, except for this breast cancer incident), and everytime some study links something to increased risk of breast cancer I am able to say - I didn't have/do that. I guess the bottom line is, perhaps I shouldn't have ever had cancer, but I did and I've moved on. Sure, it might come back again some day but except for taking tamoxifen I really feel like I'm living in the present. I've made it a point to enjoy life and do what I want, so if by chance my life gets cut short at some point I won't have any regrets over things I should have done. I do believe in my heart I have nothing to worry about, but intellectually I realize none of us *know* anything for sure. But, I figure since I don't know that I'm definitely going to get cancer again, I might as well assume & live my life as if I won't. I will always keep current with my screenings and hope to catch it very early again if it does come back. One disadvantage to having it young is the odds are greater you'll see it come back because you're not as likely to have died from something else by then (like old age)! But those are just my thoughts about my own situation, and I don't want to offend or belittle anyone else's situation. We're all unique, and do the best we can regarding our own specific circumstances.
Sue - DivaofDVC aka WDW1972 DVC '97 OKW, Beach Club, Vero Beach, & Hilton Head
Kaye301 - 21 Jan 2004 18:41 GMT wdw wrote: << I consider myself very lucky to have caught it so early - before it could be felt but when it could barely be seen on the mammogram film. >>
That is very fortunate. I caugjt mine right when it could be felt within days after last normal mammogram but when I showed it to my dr. he reminded me that the mammo had been normal.
<< and everytime some study links something to increased risk of breast cancer I am able to say - I didn't have/do that. >>
Me, too although I did have a family hx.
<< I shouldn't have ever had cancer, but I did and I've moved on. >>
Well, I can say that I shouldn't have it reach the point where it did since I did all the 'right' recommended stuff--regular mammos and self-checks because of my fam hx and then forgot about it--figuring if anything was wrong they'd (medical end) would know what to do so it would be caught early. WRONG! I would love to go back and forget about this but I am impacted by it daily--from the daily wrapping of my arm (fortunately my husband is more than willing to do that--and insists) from the lymphedema. I can handle the prostheses without an afterthought--they fit into a regular bra. I would love to let loose and have the experts handle it. Unfortunately it is too involved and there is too much for them to even keep it all straight. Like yesterday, when the spine dr. compared by 4/03 MRI with the 10/01 MRI. I just happened to bring in the copies of my films for the appt. I just realized when I began seeing him--he never got the copy of the 10/01 MRI to compare...He told me he saw marrow changes between those two....hmmm and is now first concerned about that. When I first saw him he only had m 4/03 MRI. I copy--since I have gotten copies of most scans--he saw it for the first time. Da*&, I sure would love to forget about this and leave it up to the *experts* to get it 'righ.' I probably would if I weren't at high risk. Laughing--'high risk'--I had mentioned that to the spine dr. at past appts--and it glossed over him. He wasn't at all concerned. And now--for the first time he is saying I am 'high risk' HUH? What changed?
<< I really feel like I'm living in the present. >>
I do too but unfortunately my circumstances has forced me to relegate this to be 'my present' in order to survive!
<< I've made it a point to enjoy life >>
I/we very much try to do the same. I bring my fears and concerns --here--for support and information and try not to let the rest impact me...
<< I do believe in my heart I have nothing to worry about, >> I so very wish that I could be there ...and that has led me on a course of doing whatever little I can to perhaps gain some control and hopefully stay on top of all this --and maybe, just maybe even turn the inevitable around...
<<but intellectually I realize none of us *know* anything for sure. >>
Alex - 20 Jan 2004 14:55 GMT I was diagnosed at age 40 ...the same year I was pregnant (I lost the pregnancy). After my diagnose I went to F2F support groups, most of the women were in there late 50's to 60's...retired, children grown, menopausal, and had grandchildren. There issues were very different than mine, How to cope with fertility lose, how to deal with hot flashes, how to deal with school age children, how to deal with your job. I had just lost both my parents prior to this but for women in their forties they have the added stress of dealing with their aging parents. On top of this you are told when diagnosed, younger women have more aggressive breast cancer and it usually doesn't respond to any hormonal treatments. You are told that this will be a LIFELONG issue and learn to cope with it. I am not saying it is easy to be diagnosed at any age but I think I could have coped with this a bit better at age 60 when I didn't have to deal with so many issues like kids, work, and the aggresiveness of the disease. Also at 60 I would find many more women similar in age for support and not felt like no one understands and I would not have the issue of being but into a wierd perimenopausal hell state. Also when you are age 60 - your life has 20 years left whereas at age 40 you have 40 more years to go...it seems like you are being robbed of time.
ALex
Kaye301 - 20 Jan 2004 15:05 GMT Alex wrote: << I was diagnosed at age 40 ...the same year I was pregnant (I lost the pregnancy). After my diagnose I went to F2F support groups, most of the women were in there late 50's to 60's...retired, children grown, menopausal, and had grandchildren. There issues were very different than mine... it seems like you are being robbed of time. >>
I can only imagine the fear, frustration, and difficulty you experienced at that very difficult time. I do understand although I was 10 years older. All I could remember was my past family hx which immediately flashed before my mind. I think hearing a diagnosis of cancer is difficult at any age. I went to one support group meeting. There were 2 of us who were new. I was the 3rd person to speak and gave a brief synopsis as did the other two ladies who had been in the group for awhile. When it came to the next person who was new--several after me--the rest of the group time was focused on her. She told her story and broke down in the process. I had a hard time listening to her story--as well as that of most of the others. First, the other new gal was dx'd at stage "0" and her prognosis was 99% chance of cure. Then hearling all the others was what made me realize the precarious situation I was in--and was what made me for the first time experience any depressed thoughts. I was quite naive about it all then, too, and this was about 6 mos. after my diagnosis. That was when the reality of what I was dealing with hit me.
bartalo@webtv.net - 20 Jan 2004 17:06 GMT >Also when you are age 60 - your life has 20 > years left whereas at age 40 you have 40 more years to go...it seems like you are being
> robbed of time. Another point concerning those at age 60. Yes, maybe they have gotten past taking care of aging parents, and gotten their children through their education and spent their lives doing for others and focused on being good wives and mothers. Maybe they were excited about those 20 years they "might" have left and made plans to spend some of that time selfishly doing things they personally enjoyed. They may not have expected their last years would be spent fighting this damnable disease and just going from doctor to doctor with a big "?" mark on whether they would have 5 years left to "enjoy" much less those 20 you seem to think they are due. And for many of us the stress of the bc with the Chemo, radiation, surgery etc. etc. keeps us too fatigued to enjoy what years we may have left.
In a nutshell...bc is the worse part of the crap shot no matter at which age one gets it and we are left with no choice but to cope with it as best we can.
Bea
Kaye301 - 20 Jan 2004 17:25 GMT Bea wrote: << In a nutshell...bc is the worse part of the crap shot no matter at which age one gets it and we are left with no choice but to cope with it as best we can >>
It's no fun at any age, and each age range or stage has different challenges. However, I can certainly see how a younger person would feel cheated more so or in a different way than someone who has reached their senior years...
bartalo@webtv.net - 20 Jan 2004 23:03 GMT >It's no fun at any age, and each age range or > stage has different challenges. However, I > can certainly see how a younger person > would feel cheated more so or in a different > way than someone who has reached their > senior years...
>Kaye And it seems one of my oncologists feels the same way. I will never forget when he told me how lucky I was to have gotten the bc at my age. He said "I" had an 80% cure rate but he could not give those same odds if he were giving it to a younger woman.
What confuses me (and I guess it's because I am so dumb when it comes to bc info) is why wouldn't the cure rate for the same type cancer be the same no matter what age you get it? I thought the "cure" pertains to the pathology of your type cancer etc. and not your age. He seemed to think my bc would be much more aggressive in someone younger. Well.....finally a great reason to be a senior!<g
Bea
Tim Jackson - 20 Jan 2004 23:27 GMT > What confuses me (and I guess it's because I am so dumb when it comes to > bc info) is why wouldn't the cure rate for the same type cancer be the > same no matter what age you get it? I thought the "cure" pertains to > the pathology of your type cancer etc. and not your age. He seemed to > think my bc would be much more aggressive in someone younger. > Well.....finally a great reason to be a senior!<g For a given type of cancer the probability of a cure depends on the rate of growth. The slower it grows the more likely that chemo- or hormone-therapy, or your immune system, will kill it off. In older people everything tends to grow slower, and that includes their cancers.
Tim Jackson
Alexandra Koffman - 21 Jan 2004 02:51 GMT <>
> And it seems one of my oncologists feels the same way. I will never > forget when he told me how lucky I was to have gotten the bc at my age. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bea The way it was explained to me the longer you live the more chance of breast cancer recurring ( isn't that a cheery thought). At age 40...I presented with the most aggresive options since the chance of it returning in a normal lifespan are high. It I was age 60 or 70 the oncologist would have suggested a different plan since at age 80 or 90 chances are you are going to die of something other than breast cancer. At the cure relates to the stage of breast cancer - stage 0 the non invasive type is curable....stage 1 invasive yet small sometimes will be "cured" for the lucky people at stage 2 it is a lifelong disease. Alex
bartalo@webtv.net - 21 Jan 2004 03:36 GMT >for the lucky people at stage 2 it is a lifelong > disease. Alex What are you talking about Alex? My onc insists my cancer is gone! Nulla, de nada, no more esta en mio body! Right! I told him what I thought about that because my educated friends (well "some" are my friends, I hope) in my support group tell me the truth. He does not like the fact that I read this group. Hmmmm.....I wonder why??<g
Seriously tho, I know his job is to help me to cope with this bout in case it returns but I need to know what I am up against. So even if the truth is hard to bear, we must be willing to hear it.
Bea
Alex - 21 Jan 2004 15:28 GMT > >for the lucky people at stage 2 it is a lifelong > > disease. Alex [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > friends, I hope) in my support group tell me the truth. He does not > like the fact that I read this group. Hmmmm.....I wonder why??<g I had a huge agruement with my husband when I was first diagnosed. He insisted I was "cured" ...I remember reading in Dr Loves Book that you are never cured with invasive cancer. We asked my oncologist and Surgeon who stated I was right. Your doctor is the expert in your care...he knows through his clinical practice and your past medical history that YOU will probably never have a recurrence again.. You are very lucky to have a doctor tell you this they wouldn't tell you this unless they were confident that you will never have a recurrence. My doctors have been supportive about me going on the internet but did warn me that about 50% of what you read may not be true. I always double check my sources. Perhaps your doc doesn't want you to get upset about reading something that doesn't apply to you. Alex PS Celebrex is a new and expensive anti inflammatory that doesn't have the GI side effects of the NSAIDS ( motrin, aleve, etc).
Kaye301 - 21 Jan 2004 16:21 GMT Alex wrote: << ...I remember reading in Dr Loves Book that you are never cured with invasive cancer. We asked my oncologist and Surgeon who stated I was right. Your doctor is the expert in your >>
My husband, a former cancer researcher, agrees with that 100% Now that I have learned what cancer is and something about how it works, (not that I understand it completely, but then again neither do the researchers yet), I also agree. And as far as non-invasive cancer--the chance for cure is much more likely but there is no way to guarantee. What happens when cancer cells proliferate is that a cell mutation has taken place. It may be what recognizes the cell as malignant--in other words the same mechanism that allows a foreign body (a fetus) to grow may no longer recognize cancer cells as 'foreign bodies' It has been postulated that it that mechanism may be the problem source rather than the individual cancer cell itself. Some researchers think we get cancer cells all the time but that most bodies have mechanisms to destroy them. For some reason that mechanism's ability to do that is no longer working or doesn't work as well. That is only one theory, though. One's chances of not having a cancer return are much greater if it hasn't gotten into the lymph or blood stream. I mentioned this here before--but had an interesting discussion with one of my 2nd opinion oncologists--people talk about the cancer 'coming back'--where does it come back from (the pathologyy lab?). In other words the 'mother' or mutated cell once it has mutated may always be a part of you--although there may not be enough other factors going on to let it work again, and there is a possibility that it was also removed and/or destroyed, but it is not known if it did replicate and there are other microscopic replicase of that cell somewhere in your body...
bartalo@webtv.net - 21 Jan 2004 19:26 GMT >You are very lucky to have a doctor tell you > this they wouldn't tell you this unless they > were confident that you will never have a > recurrence. Alex Before you or anyone else gets the impression that I am just a "doom and gloomer" looking for black clouds, I think I may have left out the most important part of my discussion with my Oncologist. When I asked him why I had to take Tamoxifen for 5 years if I was already cured of bc, he said it was so that I would not get any "more" bc. This infers to me that I am just as likely to get another bout as some of the rest of you. I also don't understand how, once a bc tumor has invaded one's body that they can possibly protect us from some other bc cell roaming about. When I pressed him for an honest answer, he did admit it could happen to me again and that is why I need the additional protection.
Also wouldn't being ER+ and Her2+ make me more susceptible to it than some of you who are ER neg??
Bea
Tim Jackson - 21 Jan 2004 20:01 GMT > >You are very lucky to have a doctor tell you > > this they wouldn't tell you this unless they [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Bea The point about getting "more" bc is not so much that there might be some left from this tumour but that your tissues have shown that they have the propensity to make cancer, which means there is more chance that they will do it again sometime, compared to someone who has never had it.
Even if the tumour was invasive, if there has not yet been any detectable invasion of the lymph nodes then the prognosis is good. Any cells shed from the primary tumour have not been around long enough to build up tumours in the first place they would land, so there are even less elsewhere, and whatever there may be should be highly vulnerable to the appropriate therapy. In most of these cases the cancer is truly gone. Where there is significant node involvement then it is much more of a gamble as to whether any cancer remains.
It seems to me, thinking about the genetic mechanism and so on, not surprising that more cancers happen, but surprising that they don't happen often. What was so special about that one or small group of breast cells that made them mutate into cancers. There are billions of others that live the same lifestyle, are exposed to the same carcinogens, eat the same diet, etc, etc.. What was so special about this one? This is why I believe that the nature of cancer is fundamentally random, if it were mainly determined by these external factors then cancers would burst out all over the breast, like acne, not just an odd one every 30 years or so. That said, once you have had bc once, it is clear that your genetic and environmental ducks are in the necessary row and all you are waiting for is the random component. So your risks are higher than those of Ms Average, and so you stand to gain correspondingly more from taking Tamoxifen (etc) than she does.
As to whether Tamoxifen prevents new cancers forming or just stops them growing, I think the jury is still out, but there is some evidence for the former. There is I think no question that bc survivors who take Tamoxifen tend to live longer.
Tim
Alexandra Koffman - 21 Jan 2004 22:38 GMT > Before you or anyone else gets the impression that I am just a "doom and > gloomer" looking for black clouds, I think I may have left out the most [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bea Once you have one cancer you can always get a secondary cancer...ie an unrelated cancer in the other breast. I was told by 2 of docs (GYN and oncologist) this number goes up 1% each year you live. A normal person has a lifetime risk of getting breast cancer of about 12.5% so for someone like me and age 60 - I will have 32.5% risk getting a secondary breast cancer 42.5% at age 70 and if I am lucky enough to live to age 80 the chances are stacked in the favor of me having a secondary breast cancer. This doesn't even consider I had a 29% chance of the cancer returning initially ( primary cancer recurrence).
If you can listen to the audiocast of the breast cancer update it was very informative. It will expire in a short amount of time ..so if you want to listen to it do sooner rather than later. What I got out of listening is that surivival rates for women who have stage IV breast cancer and are ER + they are living much longer....ER neg- they are "thinking " of doing research. And if you ar ER neg HER neg...there is nothing being done. And the good news for you if you had a recurrence it can respond to hormones ( and they said if you can't tolerate one you can move to another without any trouble) and you would be a candidate for Herceptin.
For me I had my last treatment in June and went wigless in Ocotober.
If you don't mind me asking how old are you ?
A. P. Thorsen - 21 Jan 2004 22:50 GMT > Once you have one cancer you can always get a secondary cancer...ie an > unrelated cancer in the other breast. . . . but bilateral mastectomies will reduce that risk significantly ;-).
Ann T. Remove 'dontsendspam' from address to reply by email
Alexandra Koffman - 22 Jan 2004 00:29 GMT I have already seen the surgeon, but I am going for genetic counseling but my husband thinks I have my mind made up to have the mastectomy....and I agree. Now my issue is when, Alex
> > Once you have one cancer you can always get a secondary cancer...ie an > > unrelated cancer in the other breast. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Ann T. > Remove 'dontsendspam' from address to reply by email bartalo@webtv.net - 22 Jan 2004 03:10 GMT >If you don't mind me asking how old are you ? I am in my early 60's. They doctor said my survival rate was better because I was in my 60's. I never thought I would be so grateful for being a senior!<g
Bea
|
|
|